From: Jim West (jwest@highland.net)
Date: Sun Jan 25 1998 - 14:34:14 EST
At 02:15 PM 1/25/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>Here's an interesting question: Why, after beginning with masc. plurals (OU
>POLLOI SOFOI KATA SARKA, OU POLLOI DUNATOI, OU POLLOI EUGENEIS (v. 26)) does
>Paul switch to neut. plurals (TA MH ONTA, TA MWRA TOU KOSMOU, TA ASQENH TOU
>KOSMOU (v. 27), TA AGENH TOU KOSMOU KAI TA EXOUQENHMENA (v. 28)) in the next
>two verses?
>
Because he switches from persons to things. In Paul's terms, spiritual
things (demons, etc) which oppose God.
>Although it is possible that the neuter plurals refer to things which Paul has
>in mind which are grammatically neuter (but what indeed?), my thought (I
>wonder what others think?) is that TA MH ONTA et. al. all refer to the
>Corinthians.
This is not possible. Paul's anthopology will not allow him such a movement
towards dehumanization. Only the demonic, evil, is impersonal and thereby
"neuter".
> Is it possible that Paul is deliberately depersonalizing them,
>not because Paul himself thinks of them in this way but because those who are
>wise according to the flesh, powerful, and well-born look thus down on them as
>not attaining to their standards? Paul's point seems to be that, however
>rejected and abused the Corinthian Christians may be by the "greats" of the
>world, God deliberately chose them to put the big shots in the world's eyes to
>shame. I notice that Paul depersonalizes the SOFOI KATA SARKA, the DUNATOI,
>and the EUGENEIS by calling them TA ONTA (v. 28, if indeed that is what TA
>ONTA refers to).
>
Most likely not.
>Anyway, that's what I think.
>
>Rev. Craig R. Harmon, pastor
>Lutheran Church of the Apostles
>5100 W. 115th Street
>Alsip, IL 60803
>
Jim
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Si comprehendis, non est Deus
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:59 EDT